Ouch. I stopped here because this is not the root cause, CO2 generation is also a symptom.
The truth is we don't actually know what effect CO2 has on the environmental temperature. There have been tests intended to replicate those effects in laboratory settings but no method of confirming what the actual effect is in the environment. If there is an effect, it has to be just a multipler of the actual root cause, which is the constant process of conversion of things which were not previously heat, to heat.
It turns out that all the energy in profit is energy sourced by that process, it has to be, because it can't be from the energy of the sun.
I explain all these technical concepts in much more detail in my own 400 odd stories on this subject, written as a long practitioner of formal Systems Engineering tools and techniques.
Here is the main uncertainty of what seems to be papered over by the CO2:
In an environment where the pressure is not constrained as something rigid, but rather it's a result of gravity, like it is in the atmospere, the gas and other molecules of all kinds are free to vibrate more in response to having more energy therefore increasing the overall volume of the atmosphere.
In this scenario, heat radiated from the planet, absorbed by those molecules, making them vibrate with more energy, just results in increasing volume, not so much temperature.
This is adiabatic expansion.
The atmosphere is not constant volume, it's more constant temperature.
I am not sure why science doesn't seem to have pounced on this yet, I can only guess it's because a lot of scientists are "gainfully employed" in the subsequently bullshit business which is CO2 mitigation.
It won't do anything to stop increase of temperature, just accelerate it, because the root cause is directly related to profit, the more profit is made by that or any other business, has to add to heat rise.
Only solar can be used to undo that, because only use of solar is actual creation, converting what would be heat, to things other than heat.
Sorry if this defuses your obviously good intentions, but if it isn't correct, then its just more virtue signalling.
